Are liberals really empathetic or do they just want to destroy middle class?

[ineverpost]

Many are upper middle class who have never experienced actual hardship in their life, yet think they know what is good for poor people.

 

[Prutfis]

I always love it when people from a tiny little country like Denmark try to tell us how to run one of the largest, most powerful Nation's in human history.....

Yeah it's not like you could learn something. With your shitty healthcare system and all.

 

[HIMBOB]

So are you interested in the HC system that allocates scarce resources most efficiently to everyone, or are you just interested in an anecdotal example of your family member getting HC once?

Both.
My experience of the latter is the result of the former.


That is not to say our hc system is as efficient as it could possibly be but it is vastly more efficient than any system America has ever had.

 

[Greoric]

Both.
My experience of the latter is the result of the former.


That is not to say our hc system is as efficient as it could possibly be but it is vastly more efficient than any system America has ever had.

How are you coming to the conclusion by the way. That's a pretty substantial revolution on what we know about economic systems that efficiently allocate scarce resources. How do centralized markets distribute HC resources more efficiently than decentralized ones, precisely?

 

[HatchetHarry]

The left is destroying the middle class. Their social welfare policies and unfair taxation of the upper class end up discouraging hard work. It’s very easy to succeed and be financially stable in America but people don’t want to put in the effort and if they do they aren’t responsible. Everyone’s trying to keep up with their neighbors. Last year when I got my new Truck Dodge Ram 1500 big horn edition with the Hemi my neighbor who I know can’t afford shit came home with a new Toyota Tundra 3 days after checking out my ride. Lol

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

How are you going to get clinicians to practice full time without paying them?

Why havent all the clinicians left all the single payer countries in the world? They must be gettind paid!!!

 

[Greoric]

Laughing at your stupidity. Your taxation is theft shtick is plain moronic. It's also laughing at libertadianism and how they disregard every real world factor when talking about their dumb ideas.

Care to make an argument?

 

[Greoric]

Why havent all the clinicians left all the single payer countries in the world? They must be gettind paid!!!

Oh.... so then its not free....

 

[HIMBOB]

How are you coming to the conclusion by the way. That's a pretty substantial revolution on what we know about economic systems that efficiently allocate. How do centralized markets distribute HC resources more efficiently than decentralized ones, precisely?

Economy of scale.

In your mind what is the cause of American health care being significantly more expensive than similar treatment elsewhere?

 

[Greoric]

Economy of scale.

In your mind what is the cause of American health care being significantly more expensive than similar treatment elsewhere?

Liscensures, IP patents for drugs, and a regulatory burden providing institutions in this country have to deal with that no other nation's government imposes on itself (I wonder why).

The implication of your conclusion is drawn from observing nearly every major developed country in the world having a UHC, and comparing it to an onion layered system of bullshit in the US. Your conclusion being: A compulsory funded monopoly must therefore be a better distributor of HC than a decentralized market ignoring effectively everything we know about economics.

 

[lfd0311]

Yeah it's not like you could learn something. With your shitty healthcare system and all.

There are 3 million more people in New York City than in all of Denmark. Educate away.

And I see you're doing that thing where you're not an American today. Cute.

 

[HIMBOB]

Liscensures, IP patents for drugs, and a regulatory burden providing institutions in this country have to deal with that no other nation's government imposes on itself (I wonder why).

The implication of your conclusion is drawn from observing nearly every major developed country in the world having a UHC, and comparing it to an onion layered system of bullshit in the US. Your conclusion being: A compulsory funded monopoly must therefore be a better distributor of HC than a decentralized market ignoring effectively everything we know about economics.

None of those reasons are exclusive to the American system. Sure each country will have its own differences but fundamentally they are similar. Can you point to a substantial point of difference?

It's true my comments are based on the real world examples, thus not all possible combinations of health care systems can be compared. Can I ask which country has a system closest to your ideal?

 

[SaiWa]

Liscensures, IP patents for drugs, and a regulatory burden providing institutions in this country have to deal with that no other nation's government imposes on itself (I wonder why).

The implication of your conclusion is drawn from observing nearly every major developed country in the world having a UHC, and comparing it to an onion layered system of bullshit in the US. Your conclusion being: A compulsory funded monopoly must therefore be a better distributor of HC than a decentralized market ignoring effectively everything we know about economics.

- licensure in the medical field is a requirement almost every country around the world. at least every western country for sure.

- IP Patent for drugs? lol. yeah that's why the Epipen went $100 to $600 to deliver $1 worth of medicine. While we were paying $600 it was being sold for $60-80 in UK and Australia. My cousin worked for Pfizer and she can tell you all about how Mylan financially screwed Americans and her company's reputation got dragged through the mud because of it.

- regulatory burden? Is that what you are blaming for the rising cost of prescription drugs? close if not more than 10% increase each year? higher drug prices and yet even higher pharma profits.

And I am just talking about prescription drugs here. I haven't even touched on the insurance side. Both of these components of the healthcare industry are making an insane amount of profit and its going up each year.

We are getting gouged because we don't have enough regulations to control this BS.

 

[Rod1]

Your conclusion being: A compulsory funded monopoly must therefore be a better distributor of HC than a decentralized market ignoring effectively everything we know about economics.

You clearly need to study more about economics then.

 

[Greoric]

You clearly need to study more about economics then.

I'm up for correction then... How is government a better arbiter of market signals than a decentralized market?

 

[Rod1]

I'm up for correction then... How is government a better arbiter of market signals than a decentralized market?

You are under the assumption that the healthcare industry is just like any other market. Do you have any vet friends? i do, both in the pet and the livestock industry.

The human healthcare market doesnt responds well to market forces, because the market itself is already distorted in the first place, and its distorted at the core due to human morality.

 

[Greoric]

You are under the assumption that the healthcare industry is just like any other market. Do you have any vet friends? i do, both in the pet and the livestock industry.

The human healthcare market doesnt responds well to market forces, because the market itself is already distorted in the first place, and its distorted at the core due to human morality.

The fact that it's just different isn't an argument, and you're trying to save face now with your opening comment. Why would any difference with HC (an inelastic demand perhaps?) completely reverse the fundamentals of an efficiency difference between centralized and decentralized markets to the extent that the local knowledge problem also reverses arbitrarily with HC as compared to everything else?

You have a tall order in front of you bub, and its going to be engaging seeing you squirm out of it. Good luck.

 

[Gutter Chris]

A compulsory funded monopoly must therefore be a better distributor of HC than a decentralized market ignoring effectively everything we know about economics.

Yes I agree with this

and im ok with a guy with a gun showing up at someones house and putting them in a cage over it as you like to ask

I think a national plan would be in our countries best interest from everything I have read on the subject , and think the for profit or middle class pays for everyone model we have now is garbage and if you arent rich is the worst in the civilized world.

 

[Greoric]

Yes I agree with this

and im ok with a guy with a gun showing up at someones house and putting them in a cage over it as you like to ask

I think a national plan would be in our countries best interest from everything I have read on the subject , and think the for profit or middle class pays for everyone model we have now is garbage and if you arent rich is the worst in the civilized world.

You get 10/10 with me for your integrity. Why do you imagine a monopoly is the most efficient distributor of scarce resources in this space?

 

[Greoric]

None of those reasons are exclusive to the American system. Sure each country will have its own differences but fundamentally they are similar. Can you point to a substantial point of difference?

It's true my comments are based on the real world examples, thus not all possible combinations of health care systems can be compared. Can I ask which country has a system closest to your ideal?

Yes the compliance costs are unique to the US as opposed to any other nation.... because no gov't would impose the same costs on itself. Shocking right?